Remote Work in Russia: Legal Framework and Compliance Guide for Employers

 

September 30, 2025

BRACE Law Firm ©

 

During the spread of Covid-19, working from home became a common practice. While the pandemic has ended, the popularity of remote work persists. Remote work offers distinct advantages: for the employer, it reduces workstation equipment costs and allows for the recruitment of specialists from any region; for the employee, it eliminates the need to spend time and money on commuting and provides a flexible work schedule. However, such labor conditions involve many "pitfalls", for both parties.

Furthermore, legislation regulating remote work has undergone serious changes in recent years: rules for documenting relations with remote workers, specifics of labor organization, and additional grounds for termination have been established.

In this article, we consider how to organize a remote work regime to maintain a balance of interests for both parties and minimize the risks of unfavorable consequences.

What is remote work?

Chapter 49.1 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation (the "Labor Code"), regulates work in a remote regime. Pursuant to Article 312.1 of the Labor Code, remote (off-site) work is the performance of a job function defined by an employment contract outside the location of the employer, its branch, representative office, or other separate structural unit (including those located in another area), outside a stationary workplace, territory, or facility directly or indirectly under the employer's control, provided that information and telecommunications networks, including the "Internet", and public communications networks are used to perform the job function and for interaction between the employer and the employee.

Thus, work is recognized as remote if two conditions are met:

• The employee performs the job function outside the employer's location;
• The employee and employer use the Internet and public communications networks for work and interaction on issues related to its performance.

One should distinguish remote work from homeworking. Homeworkers perform work at home that has a tangible result (e.g., assembling pens, gluing envelopes) using materials and tools allocated by the employer or acquired by the homeworker at their own expense. Remote work is more intellectual in nature and, as a rule, does not have a material result.

The Labor Code provides for three possible options for remote work:

• Permanent, when the employee performs their job functions remotely throughout the entire term of the employment contract;
• Temporary, when remote work is performed during a certain period (up to 6 months);
• Combined (hybrid), when periods of the employee's performance of the job function remotely alternate with periods of the performance of the job function at a stationary workplace.

Below, we consider how to introduce a remote work regime in a company.

Who can be transferred to remote work?

In practice, the question often arises: can any employee be transferred to remote work? Formally, the Labor Code contains no restrictions. For example, it is not prohibited for internal and external part-time employees to work remotely.

Supervisory and judicial authorities hold a different opinion regarding persons residing abroad. Thus, according to the Ministry of Labor of Russia, [1] one cannot conclude an employment contract on remote work with persons who reside outside the RF, regardless of their status (citizens of the RF, foreigners, or stateless persons). To substantiate this position, the agency indicated that pursuant to Article 13 of the Labor Code, labor law norms apply only in the territory of Russia. The agency recommends documenting relations with specialists performing activities from abroad by concluding civil law contracts.

How to introduce remote work?

With newly hired employees, the parties conclude an employment contract specifying such a feature of labor. If the employee is already hired, then to transition to remote work, one must generally execute a supplemental agreement to the employment contract. Note that transferring to remote work is not an obligation of the employer.

Thus, in Case No. 2-546/2023, [2] the head of the human resources department N. submitted an application to the employer for a transfer to remote work due to family circumstances. The employer suggested continuing work on the previous terms. N. wrote an application for termination of employment. Believing that the employer committed a violation of her labor rights, N. subsequently appealed to the court with a claim to recognize the refusal to provide remote work as illegal.

The court indicated that the transfer of an employee to remote work by virtue of the provisions of Article 312.9 of the Labor Code belongs exclusively to the competence of the employer and is adopted taking into account the nature of the employee's official duties and the availability of the opportunity to provide such work. Considering the violations in personnel work identified during the inspection of the institution, the court agreed with the employer's opinion that the presence of the plaintiff at the workplace was necessary for the purpose of correcting the identified violations. The court denied the claim to recognize the refusal as illegal.

The Labor Code also establishes cases when the employer can transfer to remote work without the employee's consent. Pursuant to Article 312.9 of the Labor Code, this is permitted in cases of:

• A catastrophe, fire, or flood;
• An industrial accident or workplace injury;
• An epidemic or epizootic;
• A decision of a state power or local self-government body;
• In other exceptional situations threatening the life or normal living conditions of the population.

The transfer is carried out for the period of the duration of these circumstances. Amending the employment contract is not required, but the employer must adopt a local act establishing the reason for the transfer, the list of employees being transferred to remote work, and the procedure for organizing their labor. The employee must be familiarized with the specified act. Upon completion of these circumstances, the employee is provided with the previous work.

In cases where the transition to remote work was carried out by agreement of the parties, one can return the employee to the office in the same manner by concluding a new supplemental agreement with them. The employer can change labor conditions unilaterally only in cases of changes in organizational or technological labor conditions in compliance with the requirements of Article 74 of the Labor Code. Let us illustrate with an example from judicial practice.

Thus, in Case No. 2-2227/2023, [3] a supplemental agreement to the employment contract was concluded between the employee and the employer, according to which the work is remote. Subsequently, the employee was served a notice that for reasons related to changes in organizational labor conditions, the terms of the supplemental agreement on remote performance of work were canceled in 2 months. Subsequently, the employment contract was terminated under Clause 7 of Part 1 of Article 77 of the Labor Code due to the employee's refusal to continue work under the changed labor conditions. Not agreeing with the dismissal, the employee appealed to the court with a claim for reinstatement at work and recovery of wages for the period of forced absence in the amount of 847,583 rubles. The court indicated that a change in a material condition of an employment contract is possible either by agreement of the parties, which was not reached by the parties, or for reasons related to a change in organizational or technological labor conditions (changes in production technique and technology, structural reorganization of production, other reasons). In the case under consideration, the real reason for the employer's unilateral change in the terms of the employment contract was an increase in the volume of work not related to a change in organizational and technological labor conditions. The claim was satisfied in full.

Specifics of concluding an employment contract with a remote worker

The content of an employment contract with a remote worker must correspond to the general requirements established in Article 57 of the Labor Code. However, there are specific features.

The employment contract should indicate whether remote work will be performed on a permanent basis, or temporarily, or in a hybrid manner (Part 2 of Article 312.1 of the Labor Code).

The question of whether it is necessary to stipulate the place of work of a remote worker in the employment contract and how to correctly define it remains debatable. According to the clarifications of Rostrud, [4] the place of work of a remote worker is the place of performance of labor duties. At the same time, it is sufficient to specify the information about the place of work down to the locality. The place of performance of the job function is not always important for the employer. If the place of work is not defined in the employment contract, the employee determines it independently. However, as we will see below, this may be important when deciding on the possibility of terminating the employment contract with a remote worker.

In most cases, the remote worker establishes the work time and rest time regime independently. However, if necessary, this can be regulated in the employment contract, as can the procedure for interaction with the employer. In the case of hybrid work, it is advisable to stipulate in the employment contract the procedure for the employee's appearance to perform the job function at a stationary workplace.

At the same time, as Rostrud indicates, [5] the inclusion in the employment contract of a condition on the interaction of the parties to labor relations in the form of visiting the employee during work time to exercise control over the work process is unlawful and contradicts the provisions of labor legislation.

Prior to the conclusion of the employment contract, the applicant must provide the documents necessary for employment. Their list is standard and provided for by Article 65 of the Labor Code. They can be transferred to the employer on a paper medium or in the form of electronic documents if the employment contract is concluded by means of an EDO. In the case of exchanging electronic documents, the employee is obliged, at the request of the employer, to provide their notarized copies on a paper medium (Part 3 of Article 312.2 of the Labor Code). Also, before signing the employment contract, it is necessary to familiarize the applicant with the collective agreement, Internal Labor Regulations, and other local normative acts directly related to their labor activity.

Procedure for interaction between a remote worker and an employer

The exchange of documents with a remote worker can be carried out both in electronic form and on paper, depending on the agreement of the parties.

In the case of using an EDO for signing an employment contract, supplemental agreements to it, liability agreements, and apprenticeship contracts, the employer is obliged to use an enhanced qualified electronic signature (UK(E)P), and the employee — an UK(E)P or an enhanced unqualified electronic signature (UN(E)P).

In other cases, interaction may also occur in a different form. For example, the parties can stipulate the possibility of sending information and work results via corporate mail, special software, etc. The procedure for implementing interaction in a different form must be defined in a local normative act adopted taking into account the opinion of the elected body of the trade union organization, or in an employment contract (Part 3 of Article 312.3 of the Labor Code). The employer is obliged to familiarize the employee with the established rules. Failure to comply with this requirement bears significant risks for the employer.

Thus, in Case No. 88-12898/2023, [6] an employment contract on remote work was concluded between the parties, in which interaction between the parties was stipulated by means of audio-video communication, the exchange of electronic letters, and scans of documents. Subsequently, for refusing to report to the employer, the employee was dismissed due to a lack of interaction with the employer without valid reasons. During the court hearing, it was established that the employment contract did not define specific communication channels with the employee (phone numbers, email address, etc.) for interaction with the employer, and the place of performance of remote work was also not defined. The court indicated that the plaintiff's non-performance of their job functions is not of a culpable nature, but is due to the inconsistency of the employer's actions with the terms of the employment contract concluded with the employee. The wording of the dismissal was changed to dismissal at one's own request, and unpaid wages for the period of forced absence in the amount of 3,327,255 rubles and compensation for moral damage in the amount of 15,000 rubles were recovered in favor of the employee.

Specifics of labor organization of remote workers

The specifics of labor relations entail some features in the work and rest regime of remote workers. Let us consider them in more detail.

1. Specifics of the work time and rest time regime. The work regime of a remote worker is regulated in a local normative act or an employment contract. If it is not regulated, the employee determines the work time regime at their discretion. Usually, they stipulate the beginning and end of the workday, and the time of being in contact with the employer or clients. One can also establish a period of performance of work at a stationary workplace.

Work time tracking is carried out by drawing up a Time Tracking Worksheet. Work time includes not only the time for the direct performance of the job function, but also the time for interaction with the employer.

The provision of annual paid leave to a remote worker is carried out in the standard manner. At the same time, as Rostrud indicated,[7] when drawing up the vacation schedule, the employer must include all employees in it, including those working remotely on a permanent basis.

2. Remuneration. Payment terms, including the amount of the employee's official salary, supplements, allowances, and incentive payments, are established in the employment contract. At the same time, the employee's performance of the job function remotely cannot be a basis for reducing their wages (Article 312.5 of the Labor Code).

Thus, in Case No. 88-5130/2021, [8] the employer did not pay a bonus to a remote worker, which served as a reason for appealing to the court. In defense of its position, the employer claimed that it did not have the opportunity to assess the quality of work, take into account tardiness, and other criteria indicated in the Bonus Regulations that allow for the calculation of a bonus.

The court concluded that the employer's failure to perform the obligation to assess the performance indicators of a remote worker is not a basis for deprivation of a bonus. Also, the defendant did not present evidence of the existence of grounds provided for by the bonus regulations for not calculating a bonus for the plaintiff. The court recovered the unpaid bonus in the amount of 25,752 rubles and compensation for moral damage of 10,000 rubles from the employer.

3. Specifics of occupational safety. In remote work, the list of the company's obligations for occupational safety noticeably decreases. The employer is obliged to carry out:

• Mandatory social insurance of workers against industrial accidents and occupational diseases, as well as their tracking and investigation;
• Familiarization with occupational safety requirements when working with equipment and means recommended or provided by the employer (Article 312.7 of the Labor Code).

Other obligations of the employer to provide safe labor conditions and occupational safety do not apply to remote workers. In particular, there is no obligation to conduct a special assessment of labor conditions and mandatory medical examinations. An exception is if the employee works in a hybrid manner or otherwise is provided for by the local acts of the employer.

4. Specifics of labor organization. According to the general rule, the employer provides the remote worker with everything necessary for the performance of work: equipment, software and technical means, information protection means, and other necessary means. With the consent or knowledge of the employer, a remote worker can use their own or leased equipment and other means for work. In this case, the employer must pay compensation and reimburse expenses related to their use (Article 312.6 of the Labor Code).

Specifics of terminating an employment contract with a remote worker

An employment contract with a remote worker can be terminated on the same grounds as with other workers. However, Article 312.8 of the Labor Code provides for two additional grounds for remote workers:

• A lack of interaction with the employer for more than two consecutive working days without a valid reason, if a longer period is not established by local acts or an employment contract (Part 1 of Article 312.8 of the Labor Code);
• A change in the locality of the performance of the job function if this entails the impossibility of the employee's performance of duties under the contract on the previous terms (Part 2 of Article 312.8 of the Labor Code).

Dismissal under Part 1 of Article 312.8 of the Labor Code, as is already clear from the content of the norm, is allowed if the remote worker:

• Does not interact with the employer on issues related to the performance of the job function of work for the established period;
• A valid reason for such non-interaction is absent.

Thus, in Case No. 88-5182/2022, [9] an employee appealed to the court with a claim for recovery of wage arrears, compensation for delay in payment of wages, and compensation for moral damage. During the consideration of the case, it was established that the employee submitted reports on the work done in the manner provided for by the employment contract by means of placement in an information and communication network. The court of first instance satisfied the employee's claim.

The cassation court drew attention to the fact that a local act on the procedure for interaction between the parties was absent, and only general phrases were provided in the employment contract without indicating the email addresses of the parties or communication phone numbers. It indicated that the court did not check whether the plaintiff's sending of letters to the General Director's email address is a proper form of interaction between the parties, given the dismissal of the General Director. The case was sent for a new consideration.

Dismissal on this ground is a type of disciplinary sanction, in connection with which it must be carried out in compliance with the procedures and deadlines for its application provided for by Article 193 of the Labor Code.

Thus, in Case No. 88-4974/2025, [10] Sh. was hired at the Society for the position of regional sales manager outside the location of the employer. By the employment contract, the remote worker was assigned the obligation to provide the employer with a report on the work done daily in the form of an electronic document. Subsequently, the plaintiff was dismissed from their position for a lack of interaction with the employer for more than 2 consecutive working days from the day of receipt of the employer's request, which served as the reason for the employee's appeal to the court.

The employer claimed that the obligation to submit reports on the work done based on the results of the workday to the corporate email was not performed by the employee. In response to the employer's request for the reasons for not submitting daily reports, the employee indicated that, as agreed with the direct supervisor, the submission of reports was required only on Fridays. The last report was also submitted by them on Friday, and a few days later the plaintiff was disconnected from all internal services of the society (email, 1C program, internal chat of the company), accordingly, they did not receive subsequent requests from the employer.

During the court hearing, it was established that the request for providing explanations did not specify the circumstances of the violations imputed to the employee, and the employee was not familiarized with the acts on the lack of interaction and did not have the opportunity to give explanations on the circumstances. The court concluded that the failure to request explanations from the employee before applying the disciplinary sanction, as well as the issuance of the order on applying the sanction before the expiration of the two-day period for giving explanations, is a gross violation of the procedure for bringing to disciplinary liability. The dismissal order was recognized as illegal, and wages for the period of forced absence in the amount of 1,063,124 rubles and compensation for moral damage in the amount of 20,000 rubles were recovered in favor of the employee.

In addition, when making a decision on the termination of an employment contract on the specified ground, one should take into account the position of the Supreme Court of the RF, [11] that guarantees and compensations provided for by the Labor Code apply to remote workers. For example, one cannot terminate an employment contract under Part 1 of Article 312.8 of the Labor Code if the employee belongs to the categories of persons who cannot be dismissed at the initiative of the employer.

Another special ground for terminating an employment contract with a remote worker is Part 2 of Article 318 of the Labor Code.

For dismissal on this ground, it is necessary that two conditions are met:

• A change by the employee of the locality of the performance of labor activity;
• The impossibility of the employee's performance of duties under the employment contract on the previous terms.

According to Clause 16 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the RF dated 17.03.2004 No. 2 On the Application by the Courts of the Russian Federation of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, another locality is understood as a locality outside the administrative-territorial boundaries of the corresponding settlement. Based on the specified understanding, if an employee has left the city indicated in the employment contract, one can speak of a change by the employee of the locality of performance of the job function. In addition, courts check the continuation of the proper performance of official duties by the employee after moving to another locality.

As researchers of this topic point out, [12] dismissal under Part 2 of Article 312.8 of the Labor Code, unlike dismissal for a lack of interaction with the employer, does not belong to dismissals at the initiative of the employer. Accordingly, it is not required to take into account restrictions on terminating the employment contract with certain categories of workers. The same position is also supported by Rostrud. [13] Such a dismissal is also not a disciplinary sanction, in connection with which the employer has no need to comply with the procedure for its application established by Article 193 of the Labor Code.

Separately, let us draw attention to cases when the employee has gone abroad. As indicated above, Rostrud believes that the Labor Code does not provide for the possibility of concluding an employment contract on remote work with a citizen residing and performing labor activity outside the territory of the Russian Federation. Accordingly, the dismissal of an employee in connection with going abroad is recognized by courts as legal. Let us illustrate with the example of Case No. 2-2548/2023. [14]

An employment contract for remote work on a permanent basis was concluded between T. and the Bank. The worker's city of residence was indicated as the place of work. The worker moved to a settlement in Turkey. The employer, having discovered this fact, sent the worker a notice of the need to perform job functions at the place of residence in the territory of Russia. The notice was ignored by the worker. Subsequently, they were sent a notice of termination of the employment contract with a reference to Part 2 of Article 312.8 of the Labor Code. This served as the reason for his appeal to the court with a claim to recognize the dismissal as illegal, as well as for recovery of compensation for moral damage in the amount of 100,000 rubles and average earnings for forced absence in the amount of 167,804 rubles.

The employer claimed that since the bank belongs to the subjects of critical information infrastructure, the place of work of employees is of serious importance for it. The court indicated that on the part of the employer, measures to preserve labor relations were taken, the employee himself refused to return to Russia. Thus, the plaintiff's change of location without agreement contradicted the terms of the employment contract and the Labor Code. It denied the satisfaction of the claim.

Summing up, it should be said that remote work is a full-fledged form of organization of labor relations in Russia. However, for its successful implementation and use, we recommend that employers:

• Stipulate the place of work, work time regime, obligations, and other conditions material for the employer in the employment contract with a remote worker;
• Regulate in detail in a local normative act or in an employment contract the procedure for interaction with remote workers;
• Develop a system and criteria for control by which one can assess the efficiency of the remote worker's work and their compliance with labor discipline;
• Preserve for the remote worker all social guarantees and benefits provided for by labor legislation.

When carrying out these activities, remote work can become an effective tool for cost optimization and the recruitment of qualified specialists.

_____________________________

References

1. Letter of the Ministry of Labor of Russia dated 09.09.2022 No. 14-2/OOG-5755.
2. Appellate Ruling of the Supreme Court of the Chuvash Republic dated 16.08.2023 in Case No. 33-3554/2023.
3. Ruling of the First Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction dated 26.08.2024 No. 88-27727/2024 in Case No. 2-2227/2023.
4. Letter of Rostrud dated 09.04.2024 No. PG/05642-6-1.
5. Letter of Rostrud dated 17.04.2021 No. PG/08368-6-1.
6. Ruling of the Second Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction dated 23.05.2023 No. 88-12898/2023.
7. Letter of Rostrud dated 14.05.2021 No. PG/12255-6-1.
8. Ruling of the Seventh Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction dated 15.04.2021 in Case No. 88-5130/2021.
9. Ruling of the Second Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction dated 10.03.2022 in Case No. 88-5182/2022.
10. Ruling of the Third Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction dated 31.03.2025 No. 88-4974/2025.
11. Ruling of the Judicial Chamber for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 21.03.2022 No. 4-KG21-54-K1.
12. Beketova N.A. Remote worker moved to another locality: what the employer should take into account during dismissal // Kadrovik-praktik, 2024, No. 2.
13. Letter of Rostrud dated 30.03.2021 No. PG/05825-6-1.
14. Decision of the Nalchik City Court of the Kabardino-Balkarian Republic dated 22.05.2023 in Case N 2-2548/2023.